<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic RV325 Implicit deny doesn't work in Network Security</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/rv325-implicit-deny-doesn-t-work/m-p/3204872#M1065227</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;I have an RV325 that has an implicit deny at the end that doesn't work. We have a statement above that, that denies all traffic from external sources to the internal network. When it's enabled, you can't remote desktop in and works like it should. When it's disabled, you can remote in. At the bottom is the statement that is enabled that denies all traffic from all external services to all internal services. When the first deny rule is disabled and the bottom rule is enabled, you can remote in from anywhere.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Is this a bug? I know the RV325 isn't an ASA by any means, but this customer insists on using it for some reason or another.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 14:34:38 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>cwkronk01</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-02-21T14:34:38Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>RV325 Implicit deny doesn't work</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/rv325-implicit-deny-doesn-t-work/m-p/3204872#M1065227</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;I have an RV325 that has an implicit deny at the end that doesn't work. We have a statement above that, that denies all traffic from external sources to the internal network. When it's enabled, you can't remote desktop in and works like it should. When it's disabled, you can remote in. At the bottom is the statement that is enabled that denies all traffic from all external services to all internal services. When the first deny rule is disabled and the bottom rule is enabled, you can remote in from anywhere.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Is this a bug? I know the RV325 isn't an ASA by any means, but this customer insists on using it for some reason or another.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 14:34:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/rv325-implicit-deny-doesn-t-work/m-p/3204872#M1065227</guid>
      <dc:creator>cwkronk01</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-02-21T14:34:38Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: RV325 Implicit deny doesn't work</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/rv325-implicit-deny-doesn-t-work/m-p/3205023#M1065228</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="https://community.cisco.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/72056"&gt;@cwkronk01&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;I´ll take a look to confirm this but keep in mind that for good practice it is always a good idea "explicit Deny".&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;As you said RV325 my not follow the same idea of others Cisco gears.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;-If I helped you somehow, please, rate it as useful.-&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Oct 2017 15:01:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/network-security/rv325-implicit-deny-doesn-t-work/m-p/3205023#M1065228</guid>
      <dc:creator>Flavio Miranda</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2017-10-25T15:01:36Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

